Make peace with Russia

Key Points:

  • Neutral Ukraine: Ukraine foregoes NATO membership but joins the EU immediately, focusing on economic integration instead of military alliances. Ukraine joins free movement with EU, eventually Schengen zone.
  • Energy Revival: Europe rebuilds Nord Stream pipelines and resumes energy purchases from Russia. Russia must provide as much energy Europe wants to buy and the price must be below international market price.
  • Reparations & Rebuilding: Russia pays Ukraine a significant commission (15%? 20%?) on all European energy sales. The EU guarantees these funds are used transparently for Ukrainian infrastructure and rebuilding, with any surplus directly distributed to citizens. Large-scale public projects would be decided by Ukrainian referendums.
  • Demilitarization: Ukraine dismantles its army permanently.
  • Territorial Settlement: Russia withdraws from all occupied Ukrainian territories. Disputed regions become independent with residents choosing Ukrainian, Russian, or dual citizenship. Free movement and trade are guaranteed. These regions can vote on their status every five years under international supervision. All mineral mining in these conflicted regions would be managed by Russia and share of these profits paid to Ukraine in same 15-20% commission as all other Russian energy sales to Europe.
    Potential Benefits:
  • Ends the War: Offers a path to immediate ceasefire and Russian withdrawal.
  • Economic Focus: Prioritizes economic recovery and cooperation over military solutions.
  • Direct Citizen Benefit: Ensures reparations directly benefit the Ukrainian people.
  • Self-Determination: Allows disputed regions to decide their own future.
    Potential Challenges:
  • Ukrainian Security: Raises concerns about Ukraine’s security without an army, relying heavily on international guarantees.
  • EU & NATO Dynamics: May create tensions within the EU and NATO regarding Russia relations.
  • Enforcing Transparency: Requires robust mechanisms to prevent corruption and ensure funds are used as intended.
  • Public Acceptance: Needs strong support from both Ukrainian and Russian populations.
    This plan presents a bold vision for peace, but its success hinges on overcoming significant political and logistical hurdles.

The US must adopt a policy of strict non-intervention in Ukraine, ensuring no military personnel, equipment, or weapons systems are deployed to or near the region, any and all Ukrainian debt to the US be cancelled, and any and all US investments into Ukraine also be cancelled. The US must not be allowed to invest in Ukraine, only EU can participate in Ukraine but there needs to be supervision to verify that the EU does not interfere in Ukrainian investment projects on behalf of any US connected interest.

7 Likes

Withdrawing from NATO would be a significant chess piece.

4 Likes

Peace is less expensive than war…but at what cost?

1 Like

Peace is way more profitable for people. At least for the people of the USA, for the people of Europe, for the people of Ukraine and for the people of Russia. If some weapons companies and oil/gas companies would earn less, that’s not our problem and they should not be dictacting policy.

1 Like

I just don’t see Russia giving up Crimea and the Donbas. Also, I don’t see Zelensky giving up on trying to take Crimea; he’s pretty stuck in his ways with that. We also need to discuss the Kurks region of Russia, which Ukraine went into.

1 Like

Even if Russia stays in Crimea and Donbas, this can still be put in a contract in a way that it would work.

The most important point, in my opinion, is not who controls which area, but it’s about who stands to profit from the minerals and other resources in each area.

The contract simply needs to state how Ukraine is guaranteed a fair and proportional share of all the profits from selling these minerals to Europe. Regardless who pumps the oil and the gas, just calculate Ukraine’s population in comparison with Russia’s population, and that’s the approx amount of money Ukraine should be paid.

Then you resolve the Oligarch/corruption issue, by using the EU to guarantee that all these funds are used exclusively for the benefit of the Ukrainian people, and this should be in the contract that regardless which Government would be in Kyiv should be the case.

Money must only be spent on public good projects, rebuilding schools, hospitals, roads, train lines, internet, energy production plants, football stadiums, airports, and then all the rest of the money, there would be a lot of money, should be transfered to every Ukrainian citizen directly as a kind of “Universal Basic Income” directly on their bank accounts, helping to make sure Ukrainians are lifted way out of poverty and quickly.

Russia has about $100 Trillion of gas and oil, and Ukraine probably also has another $10 Trillion of it. So when Ukraine gets paid 15-20% of that, it’ll make Ukraine rich.

Someone with a vested interest, the EU, needs to guarantee and supervise it. The EU’s interest is to make sure Ukraine isn’t poor as Ukraine must immediately join the EU as a full EU member. So a poor Ukraine hurts the EU, they need to make sure these many Trillions of $ are spent correctly to rebuild and to lift the whole of Ukraine out of poverty.

And when it comes to other considerations, such as freedom of choice of the people living in Donbas and Crimea, I think the solution can simply be, to give all these residents of Donbas and Crimea full choice day 1:

  • They can Have a Ukrainian passport
  • They can Have a Russian passport
  • or They can Have both!

And then there needs to be 100% freedom of movement in and out of Donbas and Crimea in both directions, towards Ukraine and towards Russia, free movement and fully open trade for everybody.

In the same spirit, there also needs to be fully open movement and open trade from Russia to Europe and vice versa. Perhaps Russia doesn’t join the EU yet, but they need to be in a “next best scenario” in terms of open movement and open trade.

Later also, one can imagine, Russia will also resolve its Oligarch/Corruption issues, by implementing the same policy in Russia:

  • That of all revenues/profits from oil/gas need to only benefit the Russian people. That no oligarch/corruption must be possible.

But for now, let’s fix Ukraine first, then later there will probably be pressure to fix things in Russia too. We don’t need to talk about regime change. Just only to demonstrate, that it is possible to have policies that actually always benefit the people. And that it’s possible to prevent the corruption when all the finances are simply monitored transparently.

We cannot be making decisions for the Ukrainian people. Shut down NATO.

I most definitely want the war to end. However the so-called president zelinsky is nothing but an actor placed by the United States government.
The Ukrainians are the one who broke the treaty with Russia back in 2014 I believe. Knowing that he would not receive any funding from Trump peace was kept but as soon as Trump was out of office Zelinsky broke more treaty deals with Russia knowing the new corrupt Administration would give him unlimited funding (mostly money laundering) to the corrupt Ukraine.
Ukraine is one of the most corrupt places on Earth. You have sex trafficking child sex trafficking Black Market organs and there are several biolabs. George Soros and the deep state runs more of Ukraine than not.
Biden administration blew the pipeline.

1 Like

This war needs to be stopped, withdraw our funding for Ukraine and call Russia to the negotiating table to end this conflict once and for all.

1 Like

Making peace with Russia will be up to the people because our PRESIDENT TRUMP is good friends with Putin and Russia. People need to know that politicians have BRAINWASHED the world into hating Russia for DECADES…but all that will change soon…when everyone sees that Russia was never our enemy :sparkling_heart:

1 Like

Russia should not gain a single inch of soil by acting as an aggressor. You don’t reward bullies. They should have to completely withdraw from internationally recognized Ukrainian territory and then talk peace.

Russia attacked Georgia, attacked Ukraine, attacked Chechnya at what point are they a friend or peaceful?

Sure. Russia can withdraw its military and recognize Ukraines sovereignty and right to act independently and make treaties with whom it sees fit. Russia can commit to refraining from acting as an aggressor against any neighboring state and occupying any of its neighbors territory.

While I understand the call for Russia to withdraw, there’s another dimension we have to acknowledge. As long as the US continues interfering in the politics of countries surrounding Russia and disregarding the agreements made at the end of the Soviet Union in 1991, specifically, the promise that NATO would not move one inch east of Germany, Russia perceives these moves as direct threats to its security and integrity.

Russia could potentially withdraw from Ukraine, and to stay out of Georgia, Moldova, etc, but only when the US and NATO also honor their past commitments by moving back to the German border. Until then, Russia feels it has little choice but to try and mitigate perceived threats to its sovereignty. A balanced approach requires addressing the actions on both sides that have led us to this point.

Additionally, actual territorial control is less significant than the shared profit from resources to be negotiated in this peace plan, sharing this massive wealth for decades to come, could benefit neighboring countries like Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, fostering economic development across Europe. This peace plan and wealth sharing agreement could literally fund the EU memberships for Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia.

2 Likes

What threat to its sovereignty? When has NATO breached Russian borders? What treaty did Russia sign with NATO about the alleged restrictions? Russia can object to a neighboring state making a treaty or alliance but they don’t get veto power.

The resources of Ukraine are strictly Ukraine’s to negotiate and trade with. Russia can make its own separate deals for its resources. But when they prove an unreliable partner people will go elsewhere.

The Cold War didn’t end with the US “winning”, it ended in a stalemate, with clear expectations that NATO would not expand east of Germany. But since Clinton, every US administration has disregarded that, expanding NATO right to Russia’s borders. Pretending that the US doesn’t influence the politics of these countries ignores reality: the funding of NGOs, regime change efforts, and support for anti-Russian factions are all part of a playbook that includes the 2014 coup in Ukraine. This goes directly against the spirit of the 1991 agreements.

As for Ukraine, its resources are not in the hands of the Ukrainian people, oligarchs and corruption control the wealth. Suggesting Ukraine is free to negotiate its resources ignores how entrenched corruption has prevented any real benefit to the average citizen. What’s needed is external accountability, like the EU managing resource income and ensuring it goes to public infrastructure and direct citizen benefits in Ukraine, not oligarchs and corrupt Government. The US has proven it’s not neutral, and should stay out of it. The goal should be stability and prosperity for Ukrainians, not geopolitical chess by US neocons greedily wanting to take that resource wealth.

2 Likes

There was no stalemate. The Soviet Union collapsed. The Russian state lost all it’s satellites including Ukraine. What agreements? Do you have a signed treaty? If it’s just words it is worthless…

As for corruption Ukraine has come a long way since Yanukovych was ousted. They have pursued corrupt officials. Additionally corruption exists everywhere so that is not a good argument. Ukraine as a country is free to negotiate all its resources in trade deals with whom it wishes. If that excludes Russia then too bad. Ukraine will never prosper under Russian influence. Can you even point to how Russia has prospered under Putin? It is a country in decline

Not True!

1 Like